(Close Window)
Topic: Is the Hindu shuffle worth it?
Message: Posted by: The Amazing Pog (May 12, 2012 04:00AM)
Hi Folks,
No matter how smoothly done the Hindu shuffle just looks 'fake' to me; no one shuffles cards like that - it just seems to scream out 'look here' something dodgy is going on. Given that, is it worth me investing time into the various sleights connected to the Hindu shuffle, or would I be better served my mastering the various overhand moves - which look so much more natural? Or am I missing out on something important if I park the Hindu shuffle to one side?
Message: Posted by: Prophet (May 12, 2012 04:53AM)
I just have to say I use the Hindu Force allot especially if I have already forced in a different method earlier in the effect. I have never been caught on questioned on it, like many other moves timing is everything, I never really give them a chance to think about it.
Message: Posted by: The Burnaby Kid (May 12, 2012 04:58AM)
For what it's worth, people do shuffle like that in Asia. It's a bit more violent, but the style is similar. Dunno if that changes anything if nobody in your neck of the woods does it that way, though.

It's possible to do some nice sells on the HS Force, and it's not a totally unreasonable way to have a card chosen if the spectator is at a distance. Otherwise... meh, if you don't like it, don't use it. Offhand I can't think of any effects that absolutely require the HS.
Message: Posted by: Kingman (May 12, 2012 06:07AM)
If you do not feel comfortable with a move then it will be hard for you to make it seem meaningless to the spectators. Harry Lorayne, among many others uses the Hindu to great effect, but he has a way of making the moves unimportant so nobody attaches significance to it and it goes right by them. I use Hindu moves occassionally, but as with all moves there are alternatives and you just need to find the ones you are comforatable with. It is also nice to have an extra move in your arsenal just in case.

Kingman
Message: Posted by: Jim Oliver (May 12, 2012 08:14AM)
I tend to change up my shuffles from time to time during any close-up
performance, but the Hindu is still my favorite even after 35 years.

Jim
Message: Posted by: Wizard of Oz (May 12, 2012 08:36AM)
I never call out that it is a "shuffle." I just offer it as a way of picking-a-card. It appears to be a fair way of selecting a random card, and perceived as such.
Message: Posted by: Richard Schneider (May 12, 2012 09:17AM)
Yeah, as Wizard above said, never call it a "shuffle." Call it "mixing the cards." I do this pretty much with any shuffle that's not a riffle shuffle.
Message: Posted by: Ray Bertrand (May 12, 2012 01:38PM)
[quote]
On 2012-05-12 09:36, Wizard of Oz wrote:
I never call out that it is a "shuffle." I just offer it as a way of picking-a-card. It appears to be a fair way of selecting a random card, and perceived as such.
[/quote]

The Hindu shuffle is simply another tool in my tool box. I use it whenever I need to and as mentioned by the Wizard, I never make any reference to it being a shuffle. It is simply something I do to either control a card or force a card depending on the situation.

Ray
Message: Posted by: Pengnome (May 12, 2012 01:59PM)
Being able to do a variety of shuffles is good. If you are doing more than one card trick it helps keep interest.
Message: Posted by: Brad Burt (May 12, 2012 04:02PM)
Been using it for 40+ years with no problem at all. Force, control, shuffle...great and useful move.
Message: Posted by: DWRackley (May 12, 2012 05:10PM)
I use it and have never been called on it, but I when I’m going to use it, I make that my “preferred” shuffle. IOW, I don’t just do it once at “force time”. Practice leaving the bottom card in your hand when you pull out the deck. It looks identical (from the audience’s perspective) to the regular HS, but you are able to complete the shuffle several times. It looks to them like it’s just another way of mixing the cards.
Message: Posted by: The Amazing Pog (May 13, 2012 02:44AM)
O.K, I think the general consensus is that it works - providing I don't draw attention to it, and provided that I don't use it just once for 'a special move'. I guess the key here is naturalness, making it just another way I 'mix' (good word choice Richard)the cards even when I'mdoing something else (like talking etc.).

I've got so much to learn ... :)
Message: Posted by: Jim Oliver (May 13, 2012 10:11AM)
Remember to study the Masters!

Both old and new.

Jim
Message: Posted by: The Amazing Pog (May 13, 2012 12:00PM)
Ha - comedy timing: I was showing a few tricks to some people and I thought, ok, let's give the Hindu shuffle a test run since I've been discussing it on here. Worked a treat, both as a false shuffle and a force! Got good reactions, and even though one commented on the unusualness of the shuffle method, she said it looked fancy and it was how her uncle used to shuffle :) I'll give this some more practice ... It's weird, but what looks odd to me isn't always seen that way by an audience ...
Message: Posted by: Mr. Mystoffelees (May 13, 2012 01:21PM)
" It's weird, but what looks odd to me isn't always seen that way by an audience ..."

Now you are making a very important discovery- one that took me years. HS is well worth not only practice, but trying in different ways. It is one of the best ways to split a deck, have the spec insert their card, put the top stack back on with a break and bring their card to the top. Also, try turning the deck face side up and you will find even more goodies. You are on a good path, best to you...

Jim
Message: Posted by: Eric Caldwell (May 13, 2012 02:25PM)
The hindu shuffle has always seemed odd to me. My friend, who doesn't do magic, occassionally shuffles this way, but he owns over 600 board games. I wouldn't call him a casual handler of cards.

I think most people recognize magic is your craft and so they assume you will naturally be able to do things with cards that they cannot. I think this is why the hindu shuffle gets assumed to be as honest as anything else you are doing as a card magician, so long as you don't draw unnecessary attention to it.
Message: Posted by: epsilon97 (May 13, 2012 04:20PM)
I think that the Hindu Shuffle Force is too good of a force not to use the shuffle. It is amazing how easy it is to force a card using it.
Message: Posted by: The Amazing Pog (May 15, 2012 12:56PM)
Thanks for the further contributes guys. I'm a bit more sold on the Hindu shuffle now, and am working on it daily. I'll try to take on board what people say.
Message: Posted by: Vu Nguyen (May 15, 2012 04:57PM)
I can vouch that in Vietnamese culture, the Hindu shuffle is the way people shuffle. When I started magic, the standard waterfall shuffle seemed really weird to me. Now I can do both pretty easily.

What I find weird is when I switch between shuffles. It tends to make people really really suspicious.
Message: Posted by: MHamel (May 18, 2012 09:18AM)
One thing I see magicians do with the hindu shuffly is hold it weird elevated grip and then have the other hand palm up as the do the shuffle. This looks weird... I rarely do this if ever but try making it look natural. hold the deck in left hand and have back of the hand facing up. then deal the cards down on to the table. its the exact same thing but looks better. Now I know people already do this but you would be amazed how many people don't do this. Those are the ones that make the move look weird... but also it comes down to practice and handling.
Message: Posted by: Harry Lorayne (May 18, 2012 10:41AM)
If I'm reading you correctly, that is NOT the Hindu Shuffle. Which, forgive me, but in my hands looks completely natural. Up to the individual, no?
Message: Posted by: Brad Burt (May 18, 2012 03:51PM)
I was wondering about that also. The bottom or receiving hand should be palm up. The top hand which is in movement will be palm down holding it's stock by one end. If the top hand is the R.H. then it will be holding the narrow right ward end. Reverse that if it's the left hand.
Message: Posted by: FrenchDrop (May 18, 2012 04:29PM)
I've believe I've seen video of Harry using both overhand and Hindu shuffles in the same series of shuffles. I don't think it would look particularly suspicious to a lay person; it would just look like the magician's really mixing the hell out of the deck. I think the key is that Harry does the shuffles quickly and smoothly, he transitions quickly and smoothly from one type of shuffle to the other, and he's always talking to the audience and seldom looking at the cards as he shuffles. It doesn't look like he's doing a series of moves; it looks like he's just absent-mindedly fiddling with the cards while he explains something to the audience. The end result is that the audience thinks the deck has been thoroughly randomized and that the magician is almost unaware of having done so.

(Maybe it goes without saying, but I think that's a very important part of doing a convincing shuffle, whether it's overhand or Hindu or a riffle a mix of them: making it look like an afterthought by not appearing to pay much attention to what you're doing. The audience is sure the deck is mixed up now, but that's almost incidental to what the magician was doing: He doesn't say "Okay, now I'm going to shuffle the cards so they're in random order." Making it look that nonchalant is potentially harder to master than the actual moves involved in the shuffle; I know I haven't mastered it yet.)
Message: Posted by: Aus (May 18, 2012 04:52PM)
Pog
To me the hindu shuffle is an invaluable item in the magicians arsenal. When selecting things to learn I take on a diminishing returns perspective in assessing the things I wont to learn which is essentially the question of “What’s the value of the item to me for the cost of learning it?”

For me the slight has a very high value of return since only slight modifications to the basic process can produce a force, display and control as well as the shuffle itself is relatively easy to learn.
I think it would be a mistake discarding it.

Magically

Aus
Message: Posted by: Harry Lorayne (May 18, 2012 10:33PM)
At the risk of being accused of plugging my books, I'll plug my book! There's a red-black shuffle I've used for years, based on the Hindu Shuffle, in Special Effects. Might be worth a check. HL.
Message: Posted by: djurmann (May 19, 2012 01:01AM)
[quote]
On 2012-05-18 23:33, Harry Lorayne wrote:
At the risk of being accused of plugging my books, I'll plug my book! There's a red-black shuffle I've used for years, based on the Hindu Shuffle, in Special Effects. Might be worth a check. HL.
[/quote]

LOL
Message: Posted by: Mr. Mystoffelees (May 20, 2012 04:33PM)
Harry-

Good to see you on! How does on get "Special Effects"??

Jim
Message: Posted by: Harry Lorayne (May 20, 2012 05:26PM)
Easy, Jim. One sends me $93.20 if in the U.S.A., or $110.20 if out of the U.S.A., and it's done. Autographed only on request. HL.
Message: Posted by: Harry Lorayne (May 20, 2012 05:28PM)
PS: Anyone who'd like a copy of the full-page ad for that book - just send your email address to me - first address listed under this post - and I'll send it along. HL.
Message: Posted by: Mr. Mystoffelees (May 20, 2012 09:00PM)
Jake@oribus.net
Message: Posted by: J-L Sparrow (May 22, 2012 01:17PM)
[quote]
On 2012-05-12 05:58, The Burnaby Kid wrote:
Offhand I can't think of any effects that absolutely require the HS.
[/quote]
Unless I'm mixing up names, I believe [b]The Chicago Opener[/b] uses the [i]Hindu Shuffle[/i] more than once.

Sure, you could probably re-engineer the trick so that it uses something else, but the Hindu Shuffle does the job quite nicely. An [i]overhand shuffle[/i] just doesn't work as well.
Message: Posted by: Harry Lorayne (May 22, 2012 02:49PM)
Some people are just so wrong (in my opinion).
Message: Posted by: The Burnaby Kid (May 22, 2012 09:15PM)
[quote]
On 2012-05-22 14:17, J-L Sparrow wrote:
[quote]
On 2012-05-12 05:58, The Burnaby Kid wrote:
Offhand I can't think of any effects that absolutely require the HS.
[/quote]
Unless I'm mixing up names, I believe [b]The Chicago Opener[/b] uses the [i]Hindu Shuffle[/i] more than once.

Sure, you could probably re-engineer the trick so that it uses something else, but the Hindu Shuffle does the job quite nicely. An [i]overhand shuffle[/i] just doesn't work as well.
[/quote]

It uses the Hindu Shuffle, sure, but it doesn't really require it. The trick needs a key card placement and a force. Plenty of substitutes available. The use of the Hindu Shuffle to handle everything is arguably a magician's convenience more than anything.
Message: Posted by: J-L Sparrow (May 23, 2012 01:39PM)
[quote]
On 2012-05-22 22:15, The Burnaby Kid wrote:
It uses the Hindu Shuffle, sure, but it doesn't really require it. The trick needs a key card placement and a force. Plenty of substitutes available. The use of the Hindu Shuffle to handle everything is arguably a magician's convenience more than anything.
[/quote]
Good point. However, in the [b]Chicago Opener[/b] (again, I apologize if I'm using the wrong name) the magician pretends to repeat the trick, when in fact, he/she is just carrying out the second half of the trick. In each half of the trick the magician uses the [i]Hindu Shuffle[/i] for different means (as you said, in the first half as a k**-c*** placement and in the second as a f****), but to the spectator it just looks like the trick is being repeated in a very similar way. (Granted, it's not exactly the same way, but that doesn't seem to matter much to the spectator.)

So while you [i]could[/i] replace both Hindu Shuffles with substitutes, the "repetition" part of the trick wouldn't make much sense to the spectator, as the trick would look markedly different. That is, unless you replace each Hindu Shuffle with the same maneuver -- one that can accomplish both the k**-c*** placement and the f****.

(And if you do know of such a maneuver, let me know. I'd love to learn it.)

So the [i]Hindu Shuffle[/i], I think, is likely the best choice of shuffle for performing the [b]Chicago Opener[/b], since it accomplishes two different tasks while under the guise of doing just one thing.

Cheers,

-- J-L
Message: Posted by: The Burnaby Kid (May 23, 2012 07:20PM)
[quote]
On 2012-05-23 14:39, J-L Sparrow wrote:
[quote]
On 2012-05-22 22:15, The Burnaby Kid wrote:
It uses the Hindu Shuffle, sure, but it doesn't really require it. The trick needs a key card placement and a force. Plenty of substitutes available. The use of the Hindu Shuffle to handle everything is arguably a magician's convenience more than anything.
[/quote]
Good point. However, in the [b]Chicago Opener[/b] (again, I apologize if I'm using the wrong name) the magician pretends to repeat the trick, when in fact, he/she is just carrying out the second half of the trick. In each half of the trick the magician uses the [i]Hindu Shuffle[/i] for different means (as you said, in the first half as a k**-c*** placement and in the second as a f****), but to the spectator it just looks like the trick is being repeated in a very similar way. (Granted, it's not exactly the same way, but that doesn't seem to matter much to the spectator.)

So while you [i]could[/i] replace both Hindu Shuffles with substitutes, the "repetition" part of the trick wouldn't make much sense to the spectator, as the trick would look markedly different. That is, unless you replace each Hindu Shuffle with the same maneuver -- one that can accomplish both the k**-c*** placement and the f****.

(And if you do know of such a maneuver, let me know. I'd love to learn it.)

So the [i]Hindu Shuffle[/i], I think, is likely the best choice of shuffle for performing the [b]Chicago Opener[/b], since it accomplishes two different tasks while under the guise of doing just one thing.

Cheers,

-- J-L
[/quote]

If uniformity of action is the most important thing, you can get even closer to it by having the card selected from a spread both times, and then returned to the deck via shuffle both times. Then you don't have any discrepancy. Frankly, unless the second selection is being made from a distance, having that card arrived at via a Hindu Shuffle "stop" procedure is odd.

It's easy to rationalize the use of the HS since it can accomplish more than one task, both of which are involved in the trick, but that flexibility of method comes with a cost -- it's easy to teach it that way, it's easy for magicians to learn it that way, so as a result many magicians use it that way, so it becomes ubiquitous, and therefore recognizable. It's been exposed as the "Greatest Card Trick in History" (or whatever) on Youtube for a reason.
Message: Posted by: J-L Sparrow (May 24, 2012 10:02AM)
[quote]
On 2012-05-23 20:20, The Burnaby Kid wrote:
If uniformity of action is the most important thing, you can get even closer to it by having the card selected from a spread both times, and then returned to the deck via shuffle both times.
[/quote]
Wait... How can you have a card selected from a spread [i]both[/i] times? You need to force the second selection, so unless you use some sort of [i]spread force[/i], I don't see how you can have a card selected from a spread the second time.

I'm not familiar with [i]spread forces[/i] that don't employ a gaffed deck, but I suppose it could be done. I'm just not sure how it could be done (using a non-gaffed deck) without compromising uniformity.
Message: Posted by: J-L Sparrow (May 24, 2012 10:05AM)
[quote]
On 2012-05-24 11:02, J-L Sparrow wrote:
I'm not familiar with [i]spread forces[/i] that don't employ a gaffed deck, but I suppose it could be done.
[/quote]
Hmmm... it looks like I spoke too soon. A quick Google search of [i]"spread force"[/i] and [i]magic[/i] turns up some promising hits. I'll have to look into them.
Message: Posted by: The Burnaby Kid (May 24, 2012 07:09PM)
You'll find a workable one in Royal Road to Card Magic. With a bit of thought the routining should make itself obvious.
Message: Posted by: J-L Sparrow (May 25, 2012 10:09AM)
[quote]
On 2012-05-24 20:09, The Burnaby Kid wrote:
You'll find a workable one in Royal Road to Card Magic. With a bit of thought the routining should make itself obvious.
[/quote]
Thanks! I read yesterday that someone said a [i]spread force[/i] can be found in Jean Hugard and Frederick Braue's [b]Expert Card Technique[/b]. However, I was unable to find one in there. (Maybe I missed it somehow.)

I'll try [b]The Royal Road to Card Magic[/b] tonight. Thanks for your suggestion!

-- J-L
Message: Posted by: The Amazing Pog (May 29, 2012 04:59AM)
Just an update. I kept with the Hindu shuffle, and right now I'm so glad I did. An hour ago I did a very simple trick with a teenage spectator: Hindu Force, false cut, drop reveal - with a lot of babble inbetween about ideomotor detection and card-bonding (:)). He said it was the best card trick he'd ever seen and went off to tell his mates about it ...

The mechanices were super simple - it was all in the psycho-babble I just made up! Hindu shuffle for the win! :)

So, I think I'll not be too hasty to question what seems simple, odd or old anymoe. Lesson learnt.
Message: Posted by: J-L Sparrow (May 31, 2012 02:44PM)
[quote]
On 2012-05-29 05:59, The Amazing Pog wrote:
Just an update. I kept with the Hindu shuffle, and right now I'm so glad I did.
.
.
.
So, I think I'll not be too hasty to question what seems simple, odd or old anymoe. Lesson learnt.
[/quote]
Excellent! I know from experience that I'm not very good at determining if a magic trick will go over well or not. There are several tricks that at first I thought were just plain silly, until I tried them out and thoroughly amazed my audience.

So now I try not to judge a trick by its... ehm... "trick," but rather by the audience's reaction to it.
Message: Posted by: bwarren3 (Jun 2, 2012 11:44AM)
In Harry's hands some of these shuffles are just plain magic, beautiful to watch. Personally I use several different forces and shuffles so as not to repeat any one move, never had any of them questioned. It's all in the entertainment factor..
Message: Posted by: JoshuaCabaret (Jun 2, 2012 04:03PM)
The only real time I use the Hindu shuffle is when I make the deck of cards seem like its made up of only one card. Like a one way forcing deck. You would be surprised how strong the reaction can be. Also the Hindu force is nice and so it the Hindu control.